HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA BACKUP 02-06-92
PAGE OF 2
February 6, 1992
NO.
3. CONSENT CALENDAR d.
SUBJECT
DATE
ESTABLISH FEBRUARY 20, 1992, AS THE DATE FOR A
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ESTABLISHING
EQUALIZATION CHARGES FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT NO. 57 (MID-HILL SEWER PROJECT)
TYPE OF ACTION
INFORMATIONAL
SUBMmED BY
Jay S. McCoy
Infrastructure Division Manager
INITIATING DEPT.4>IV. . . D I
t:nglneenng epartment
Infrastructure Division
ISSUE: The Board of Directors must conduct a public hearing to establish equalization charges.
BACKGROUND: Local Improvement District (LID) No. 57 included seven separate properties, six
of which were assigned one unit of assessment. The seventh property was assigned two units
of assessment because the zoning at that time permitted more than one building site on this
property. Therefore, eight assessments were placed on the seven properties.
At least two properties which are outside the Assessment District boundaries can connect to the
public sewer installed by the Assessment District. When these connections occur, District staff
recommends that an equalization charge be collected from the owners of these properties. Also,
if any parcel included within the LID is subdivided in the future thus creating an additional
building site, it will be appropriate to collect an equalization charge from the owner of the
additional building site.
Equalization charges are intended to equalize the investment in, and fairly and equitably distribute
the cost of capital improvements among all properties which benefit from the improvements.
After equalization charges are collected, the money will be credited against the outstanding
balance of assessments on each property within the Assessment District. This crediting will be
accomplished by reducing the next yearly assessment which appears on the tax bill for each of
the then current owners of the properties included in LID 57.
Section 6.16.020 of the District Code provides for the Board establishing equalization charges
after conducting a properly noticed public hearing. Since equalization charges for all future
connections to the LID sewer will be considered at the proposed public hearing, no additional
public hearings will be required.
RECOMMENDATION: Establish February 20, 1992, as the date for a public hearing to consider
establishing equalization charges for Lid 57.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
INITIATING DEPTJPIV/
./ 1hl't11
130
JSM
/Jf2uJ
~",RAB
/'
1 MACIAS
2 SULLIVAN
3 GROSSGART
4 CHAPMAN
5 SWANSON
6 SPONZILLI
7 LENCI/DOLL
O=UNITS OF
. ASSESSMENTS
Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District
~
MID-HILL SEWER PROJECT
Exhibit
LID NO. 57
A
PAGE 1 OF 1
February 6, 1992
NO.
3. CONSENT CALENDAR e.
DATE
January 31, 1992
REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF REGISTRATION DIFFERENTIAL
FOR ANDREW ANTKOWIAK, ASSISTANT ENGINEER IN THE
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
TYPE OF ACTION
PERSONNEL
SUBMITTED BY
Curtis Swanson, Principal Engineer
INITIATING DEPTJDIV.
Engineering Department/Infrastructure Div.
ISSUE: Payment of a registration differential requires approval by the Board of Directors.
BACKGROUND: Andrew Antkowiak is an Assistant Engineer in the Engineering Department/
Infrastructure Division. This classification does not require registration as a professional
engineer. The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the District and Central Contra
Costa Sanitary District Employees' Association, Public Employees' Local No.1, provides for
the payment of a registration differential for employees who achieve registration or license as
Professional Engineer, Land Surveyor, or Certified Public Accountant while employed by the
District in a position not requiring such registration or license. Andrew Antkowiak has
provided evidence to his supervisors that he has passed the California Engineering Registration
Examination and is now a registered Civil Engineer. Mr. Antkowiak has consistently
demonstrated an ability to assist in the accomplishment of District activities requiring a
professional level of skills and experience normally expected of a registered engineer. Mr.
Antkowiak was notified of his successful completion of registration requirements in a letter
dated December 20, 1991. The current MOU states:
"Upon review and concurrence by the Department Manager, the recommendation shall
be forwarded to the General Manager-Chief Engineer for his approval. If approved by the
General Manager-Chief Engineer, the matter shall be presented to the Board of Directors
for consideration.
The Board of Directors shall consider each recommendation of the merit increase, and,
if granted, it shall become initially effective on the date that the employee makes written
application to the Board indicating receipt of notification of the registration and/or license
and will continue while that employee occupies a position not requiring such registration
and/or license."
Andrew Antkowiak applied for professional registration differential through his supervisors and
the Department Manager on January 13, 1992.
RECOMMENDATION: Grant Andrew Antkowiak a 5-percent salary increase effective January
13, 1992, for professional registration differential provided for in the MOU.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
INITI~
1302A-7/91
T./D IV.
iJf3J3
CWS
JSM
RAB
PAGE 1 OF 1
February 6, 1992
NO.
3. CONSENT CALENDAR f.
DATE
January 31, 1992
REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF REGISTRATION DIFFERENTIAL
FOR B. THOMAS GODSEY, ASSISTANTENGINEER IN THE
COLLECTION SYSTEM OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT
TYPE OF ACTION
PERSONNEL
SUBMITTED BY
Ba T. Than, Associate Engineer
INITIATING DEPTJDIV.
Collection System Operations
ISSUE: Payment of a registration differential requires approval by the Board of Directors.
BACKGROUND: B. Thomas Godsey is an Assistant Engineer in the Collection System
Operations Department Collection System Programs Section. This classification does not
require registration as a professional engineer. The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
between the District and Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Employees' Association, Public
Employees' local No.1, provides for the payment of a registration differential for employees
who achieve registration or license as Professional Engineer, Land Surveyor, or Certified Public
Accountant while employed by the District in a position not requiring such registration or
license. B. Thomas Godsey has provided evidence to his supervisors that he has passed the
California Engineering Registration Examination and is now a registered Civil Engineer. Mr.
Godsey has consistently demonstrated an ability to assist in the accomplishment of District
activities requiring a professional level of skills and experience normally expected of a
registered engineer. Mr. Godsey was notified of his successful completion of registration
requirements in a letter dated December 20, 1991. The current MOU states:
"Upon review and concurrence by the Department Manager, the recommendation shall
be forwarded to the General Manager-Chief Engineer for his approval. If approved by the
General Manager-Chief Engineer, the matter shall be presented to the Board of Directors
for consideration.
The Board of Directors shall consider each recommendation of the merit increase, and,
if granted, it shall become initially effective on the date that the employee makes written
application to the Board indicating receipt of notification of the registration and/or license
and will continue while that employee occupies a position not requiring such registration
and/or license."
B. Thomas Godsey applied for professional registration differential through his supervisors and
the Department Manager on January 27, 1992.
RECOMMENDATION: Grant B. Thomas Godsey a 5-percent salary increase effective January
27, 1992, for professional registration differential provided for in the MOU.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
f>\"\
diV
INITIATING DEPTJDIV.
1302A-7/91
BTT
JAL
PAGE 1 OF 21
NO.
3. CONSENT CALENDAR g.
DATE
February 3,1992
TYPE O)<<)T6~ RESOLUTIONS;
APPROVE DRAFT
RESPONSES
SUBMITTED BY
Walter N. Funasaki, Finance Officer
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Administrative/Finance & Accounting
ISSUE: Board resolutions affirming the establishment of new refuse collection rates for Valley
Waste Management and Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service, Inc. effective January 1, 1992 are
submitted for adoption. Draft responses to written comments submitted by the City/Town
Councils for the Board's consideration during the Public Hearing are provided for approval.
BACKGROUND: Applications for refuse collection rate adjustments were submitted by Valley
Waste Management and Orinda-Moraga Disposal in November 1991. After obtaining the
results of the District staff analyses, and written comments from the affected city and town
councils and the general public at public hearings held on January 30, 1992, the Board of
Directors established the refuse collection rates based on the following rate adjustments:
Vallev Waste Manaaement
A 3.43 percent decrease in all rates effective January 1, 1992 was set, with residential
rates established on the basis of the final year of the three-year conversion to fully
uniform rates. The City of Lafayette has been provided the option of not being included
in the new residential automated collection program. If the City of Lafayette elects not
to be included, it must notify the District by the end of February 1992. In the event the
City of Lafayette decides to participate in the automated program, a $1.45 per
month/per household decrease from the new rates will be provided as the new
residential automated collection program is phased-in during the summer of 1992,
except that the 7,400 pilot program participants in the Town of Danville will obtain the
$1.45 per month rate decrease effective January 1, 1992. In the event the City of
Lafayette decides not to participate in the automated program, a $1.85 per month/per
household rate decrease will be provided instead of $1.45 per month/per household.
Orinda-Moraga DisDosal Service. Inc.
A 9.87 percent increase in all rates effective January 1, 1992 was set, with residential
rates established on the basis of the final year of the three-year conversion to fully
uniform rates.
Resolutions establishing the new collection rates are attached.
RE~EWEDANDRECOMMENDEDFORBOARDAcnON
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
.I
~
SUBJECTADOPT RESOLUTIONS AFFIRMING THE ESTABLISHMENT
OF NEW REFUSE COLLECTION RATES FOR VALLEY WASTE
MANAGEMENT AND ORINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE,
INC., EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1992, AND APPROVE DRAFT
RESPONSES TO LETTERS SUBMITTED BY AFFECTED CITY/
TOWN COUNCILS
POSIITIONPAPER
2
21
PAGE
DATE
OF
February 3, 1992
Draft responses to the written comments submitted by the City/Town Council of Danville,
Lafayette, Orinda, and Moraga are attached.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 92-007 and Resolution No. 92-008 affirming the
establishment of new refuse collection rates effective January 1, 1992 for Valley Waste
Management within Zones 2, 4, and 5 and Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service, Inc. within Zones
1 and 1A, respectively. Approve responses to City/Town Councils' written comments.
ADS/PosPaper'3/ AdptVWMO.pp
1302B-7/91
RESOLUTION NO. 92-007
A RESOLUTION AFFIRMING THE EST ABLlSHIMENT OF
NEW RATES FOR REFUSE COLLECTION
FOR VALLEY WASTE MANAGEMENT WITHIN ZONES 2,4, AND 5
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1992
WHEREAS, Chapter 8.08 of the Code of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
provides that the Board shall, from time to time, establish by resolution, rates for refuse
collection in the respective zones as established in Section 8.08.010 of said Code; and
WHEREAS, after extensive staff analysis, and public hearing held on January 30,
1992, which was advertised and otherwise publicized in newspapers circulated within the
District;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
THAT, the new schedule of rates for refuse collection to be effective January 1,
1992, within Zones 2, 4, and 5, which were established on January 30, 1992, be
affirmed; the schedule of rates is shown on the attached Exhibit A.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of February 1992 by the Board of Directors
of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District by the following vote:
AYES:
Members:
NOES:
Members:
ABSENT:
Members:
President of the Board of Directors,
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District,
County of Contra Costa, State of California
COUNTERSIGNED:
Secretary, Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District, County of Contra
Costa, State of California
Approved as to Form:
Kenton L. Aim
District Council
ADS/Pos PaperI3/AdptVWM.res
VALLEY WASTE MANAGEMENT Exhibit A
FRANCHISE ZONES 2, 4 AND 5
SCHEDULE OF MONTHLY RATES
AutCllll8ted
Former New Collection
Rates Rates Rates
--------.... ----..---- ---------
RESIDENTIAL SERVICE:
1 32-gal. can weekly * S 18.45 17.DO 15.55
2 32-gal. can weekly * 34.20 34.00 32.55
3 32-gal. can weekly * 50.00 51.00 49.55
4 32-gal. can weekly * 65.80 --68.00 66.55
5 32-gal. can weekly * 81.60 85.00 83.55
6 32-gal. can weekly * 97.40 102.00 100.55
7 32-gal. can weekly * 113.20 119.00 117.55
8 32-gal. can weekly * 128.95 136.00 134.55
Each additional can--non-regular 5.00 4.85
<rr pick-up) 22.65 20.40
1 can weekly - Specia service
(hilly) areas 37.40
2 can weekly - Special service 38.40
3 can weekly - Special service 54.25 54.40
4 can weekly - Special service 70.00 71.40
1 45 gal. can 30.05 25.50
2 can 54.75 51.00
1 supercart 50.85 51.00 49.55
1 supercart-Danville 47.60 48.00 46.55
Townhouse: 1 can 16.90 15.55 14.10
2 can 32.70 32.55 31.10
3 can 48.45 49.55 48.10
MULTI-APARTMENT SERVICE:
Each apartment weekly 17.95 17.35
Each additional can weekly 12.05 11.65
Each additional can - non re~ular 6.65 6.40
(per pic -up)
COMMERCIAL SERVICE:
One can week l r 24.80 23.95
Each aditiona can weekly 9.80 9.45
Each additional can -- 6.25 6.05
non-regular
One Cubic Yard:
One time per week 93.45 90.25
Two times per week 159.75 154.25
Three times per week 226.05 218.30
Four times per week 292.35 282.30
Five times per week 356.95 344.70
Two Cubic Yards:
One ti me per week 159.75 154.25
Two times per week 292.35 282.30
Three times per week 424.95 410.35
Four times per week 557.70 538.55
Five times per week 690.15 666.50
Three Cubic Yards:
One time per week 220.40 212.85
Two times per week 423.60 409.05
Three times per week 637.40 615.55
Four times per week 849.90 820.75
Five times per week 1,048.75 1,012.80
Four Cubic Yards:
One time per week 292.35 282.30
Two times per week 556.65 537.55
Three times per week 795.50 768.20
Four times per week 1,034.05 998.60
Five times per week 1,273.65 1,229.95
Six Cubic Yards:
One time per week 416.75 402.45
Two times per week 833.35 804.75
Three times per week 1,222.20 1,180.30
Four times per week 1,625.00 1,569.25
Five times per week 2,027.75 1,958.20
COMPACTED REFUSE SERVICE:
Per cubic yard 32.45 31.35
DROP BOX SERVICE:
Seven cubic yards
<dirt and rocks) 303.40 293.00
Fourteen cubic yards 212.25 204.95
Twenty cubic yards 303.40 293.00
Thirty cubic yards 455.10 439.50
Forty cubi c yards 606.95 586.15
* Includes two 32-gallon cans of garden trimmings per
week and three refuse cleanups per year.
RESOLUTION NO. 92-008
A RESOLUTION AFFIRMING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF
NEW RATES FOR REFUSE COLLECTION
FOR ORINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC. ZONES 1 AND 1A
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1992
WHEREAS, Chapter 8.08 of the Code of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
provides that the Board shall, from time to time, establish by resolution, rates for refuse
collection in the respective zones as established in Section 8.08.010 of said Code; and
WHEREAS, after extensive staff analysis, and public hearing held on January 30,
1992, which was advertised and otherwise publicized in newspapers circulated within the
District;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
THAT, the new schedule of rates for refuse collection, to be effective January 1,
1992, within Zones 1 and 1 A, which were established on January 30, 1992, be affirmed;
the schedul~ of rates is shown on the attached Exhibit A.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of February 1992 by the Board of Directors
of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District by the following vote:
AYES:
Members:
NOES:
Members:
ABSENT:
Members:
President of the Board of Directors,
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District,
County of Contra Costa, State of California
COUNTERSIGNED:
Secretary, Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District, County Of Contra
Costa, State of California
Approved as to Form:
Kenton L. Aim
District Council
ADS/Pol PaperI3/AdptO-M.R11
ORINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC.
FRANCHISE ZONE NO. 1
SCHEDULE OF MONTHLY RATES
FOl'IIIer -. New
Rates Rates
------------ -----------
ORINDA - FULL SERVICE
-----------------------------------
REGULAR SERVICE:*
1 can S 19.35 20.35
2 can 35.95 40.70
3 can 52.55 61.05
4 can 69.15 81.40
5 can 85.75 101.75
6 can 102.35 122.10
One can - Senior Citizen 16.35 17.35
Extra can on route 4.50 4.95
Special pick-up - 1 can 12.70 13.95
Special piCk-up - each add'l can 4.50 4.95
MINIPACKER SERVICE:
1 can 26.10 27.05
2 can 42.70 47.40
3 can 59.30 67.75
4 can 75.90 88.10
ODD SERVICE:
1-45 gal. can 27.35 30.55
1-45 gaL. can and 1-32 gaL. 43.95 50.90
1-45 gaL. can and 2-32 gaL. 60.55 71.25
4-45 gaL. can 98.70 122.20
COMMERCIAL SERVICE:
One can weekLy 25.60 28.15
Each additional can weekLy 10.75 11.80
MULTI-APARTMENT SERVICE:
Per lM'li t per week 16.15 17.75
Each additional pick-up per week 2.60 2.85
COMPACTED REFUSE SERVICE:
Per cubic yard 31.45 34.55
BULK SERVICE:
ONE YARD:
Once per week 94.50 103.85
Twice per week 165.55 181.90
Three times per week 235.95 259.25
Four times per week 306.40 336.65
Five times per week 3n.45 414.70
TWO YARD:
Once per week 165.55 181.90
Twice per week 306.40 336.65
Three times per week 447.95 492.15
Four times per week 589.25 647.40
Five times per week 731.00 803.15
SPECIAL:
One yard 18.85 20.70
Two yards 37.80 41.55
Exhibit A
OlINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC.
FRANCHISE ZONE NO. 1
SCHEDULE OF MONTHLY RATES
Current New
Rates Rates
DROP BOX SERVICE:
Twenty cubic yards
Five yards - dirt and concrete
Sixteen yard school box -
5
311.75
311.75
249.35
342.50
342.50
273.95
OlINDA - NO BRUSH SERVICE
REGULAR SERVICE:
1 can
2 can
3 can
1 can-Senior Citizen
16.50 17.65
33.10 38.00
49.70 58.35
15.00 16.15
23.25 24.35
39.85 44.70
56.45 65.05
73.05 85.40
31.15 36.55
50.75 60.90
MINIPACKER SERVICE:
1 can
2 can
3 can
4 can
1-45 ga l. can
1-45 and 1-32 gal. can
*
Incluc:les one 32-gallon can of garden trinmings per week and
three refuse cleanups per year
**
A charge of 527.35 per week applies for each week not serviced
ORINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC.
FRANCHISE ZONE NO. 1A
SCHEDULE OF MONTHLY RATES
Current -- New
Rates Rates
------------ -----------
MORAGA - FULL SERVICE
----------------------------------.
REGULAR SERVICE:*
1 ean S 17.40 18.20
2 ean 32.30 36.40
3 can 47.15 54.60
4 ean 62.05 72.80
5 ean 76.95 91.00
6 ean 91.85 109.20
Extra ean on route 4.50 4.95
Speeial piek-up - 1 ean 12.70 13.95
Special piek-up - eaeh add'l ean 4.50 4.95
MINIPACKER SERVICE:
1 ean 25.70 26.45
2 ean 40.60 44.65
3 ean 55.50 62.85
4 ean 70.40 81.05
5 ean 85.25 99.25
ODD SERVICE:
One ean - 45 gal. 24.85 27.30
One ean - 1/45 and 1132 gal. eans 39.75 45.50
One ean - 1/45 and 2/32 gal. eans 54.65 63.70
I
COMMERCIAL SERVICE:
One ean weekly 25.60 28.15
Eaeh additional ean weekly 10.75 11.80
MULTI-APARTMENT SERVICE:
Per uni t per week 16.15 17.75
Eaeh additional piek-up per week 2.60 2.85
COMPACTED REFUSE SERVICE:
Per eubie yard 31.45 34.55
BULK SERVICE:
ONE YARD:
Once per week 94.50 103.85
Twi ee per week 165.55 181.90
Three times per week 235.95 259.25
Four times per week 306 .40 336.65
Five times per week 377 .45 414.70
TWO YARD:
Once per week 165.55 181.90
Twi ee per week 306.40 336.65
Three times per week 447.90 492.10
Four times per week 589.25 647.40
Five times per week 731.00 803.15
SPECIAL
One yard 18.85 20.70
Two yards 37.80 41.55
~~ ~. -~- -:,.;,.'-~~.-"" -. .' '-
OlINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC.
FRANCHISE ZONE NO. 1A
SCHEDULE OF MONTHLY RATES
DROP BOX SERVICE:
Twenty cubic yards
Five yards - dirt end concrete
Sixteen yard school box -
MORAGA - NO BRUSH SERVICE
REGULAR SERVICE:
1 can
2 can
3 can
Extra can on route
Special pick-up - 1 can
Special pick-up - each add'l can
ODD SERVICE:
One can - 45 gal.
One can - 1/45 and 1132 gal. cans
2-45 gal. can-small truck
LAFAYETTE SERVICE
REGULAR SERVICE:*
1 can $
2 can
3 can
Extra can on route
1-45 gal. can
MINIPACKER SERVICE:
1 can
2 can
3 can
Extra can on route
1-45 gal. can and 1-32 gal. can
*
Current New
Rates Rates
s
311.75
311.75
249.35
342.50
342.50
273.95
15.85
34.05
52.25
4.95
13.95
4.95
21 .70
36.45
43.40
Current New
Rates Rates
17.00
34.00
51.00
4.85
25.50
20.50
37.50
54.50
4.85
47.00
Includes one 32-gallon can of garden trinmings per week and
three refuse cleanups per year
14.90
29.80
44.70
4.50
12.70
4.50
19.25
30.70
37.65
18.45
34.20
50.00
5.00
27.90
22.75
38.75
54.90
4.80
48.00
**
A charge of $27.35 per week applies for each week not serviced
DRAFT
February 4, 1992
Beverly Lane, Mayor, and Town Council Members
Town of Danville
310 La Gonda Way
Danville, CA 94526-1740
Dear Mayor Lane and Council Members:
I would like to extend our appreciation to the Town Council of Danville for the thoughtful
written comments provided for our Board's consideration during the public hearing to
establish refuse collection rates effective January 1, 1992.
I'm sure your Council and the residents of Danville will be pleased to learn that a rate
decrease of 3.43 percent was established. Additionally, automated collection pilot
program participants will receive a $1 .45 per household monthly rate decrease effective
January 1, 1992. Other Danville ratepayors will have their rates lowered by the $1.45
when automated collection arrives in their neighborhood beginning in July 1992. As the
quarterly billing covering January through March 1992 has already been mailed, both the
3.43 percent decrease in the basic collection rates, and the $1.45 reduction for
automated collection for 7,350 residents will appear as a credit adjustment in the next
quarterly bill.
Your Councils' comments were given careful consideration during the public hearing ar:'ld
rate-setting process. I would like to address each of the comments provided by your
Council in the balance of this letter.
DRAFT
Beverly Lane, Mayor, and Town Council Members
Page 2
February 4, 1992
The District's Board authorized the implementation of the residential automated curbside
collection program on a District-wide basis by Valley Waste Management, based upon the
excellent results of the pilot program in Danville. In establishing the automated collection
rates, the vehicles and containers were depreciated over the eight-year useful life of these
assets. While the eight-year depreciation period extends beyond the expiration of the
franchise agreement on February 28, 1996, notification to the refuse collector as to
whether the option for five additional years will, or will not, be exercised by the District
must be given by March 1, 1994; therefore, prior to March 1, 1994, the Town of Danville
will be consulted to determine their plans regarding assumption of the franchise
agreement, and the method by which the refuse collector may recover the loss, if any,
between the book value and market value of the capital equipment through collection
rates set in 1 994 and 1 995.
The annual closure and post-closure cost assessment of $407,000 was excluded from
operating expenses, and will be considered whenever the County actually implements the
assessment program.
An adjustment to the Acme Transfer Station fee may occur during 1992, which would
reflect the disposal fee at the Keller Canyon landfill. The District will consider initiating
a mid-year rate adjustment if the transfer station fee is decreased, and will accept a mid-
year request by the refuse collector if the transfer station fee is increased.
DRAFT
Beverly Lane, Mayor, and Town Council Members
Page 3
February 4, 1992
The Board approved $250,000 in intercompany charges, after reviewing the nature and
amount of the expense reductions and services claimed to have been received by the
refuse collector from the parent company.
The support and cooperation received from the Town of Danville in the successful
completion of the automated collection pilot program are greatly appreciated. The
program will now provide benefits to all ratepayers in the Valley Waste Management
service area in the form of lower collection rates.
Your Council's comments were helpful and appreciated.
Sincerely,
Parke L. Boneysteele, President
Board of Directors
PLB:dp
ADS/Funasaki #2/Lane.Ltr
February 4, 1 992
Mr. Donald Tatzin, Mayor.
and Council Members
City of Lafayette
3675 Mt. Diablo Blvd., Suite 210
Lafayette, CA 94549
Dear Mayor Tatzin and Council Members:
I would like to extend our appreciation to the City Council of Lafayette for the thoughtful
written comments provided for our Board's consideration during the January 30, 1992
public hearing to establish refuse collection rates effective January 1, 1992. The
Councils' comments were given careful consideration during the public hearing and rate-
setting process. I would like to address each of the comments provided by your Council
in the balance of this letter.
. The City indicated that it was in favor of reducing collection rates by 3.98 percent
in accordance with the District staff's recommendation. Following the public
hearing on January 30, 1992, the Board established a reduction in rates of 3.43
percent. The slightly lower rate reduction resulted from authorizing a change from
a quarterly billing cycle to a new bimonthly billing cycle, and setting the cost of
Mayor Tatzin
Page 2
February 4, 1992
service modification factor at 1.05 to reflect the recycling programs implemented
by Valley Waste Management throughout the service area.
. The District's Board authorized the implementation of the residential automated
curbside collection program on a District-wide basis by Valley Waste Management,
based upon the excellent results of the pilot program in Danville. In establishing
the automated collection rates, the vehicles and containers were depreciated over
the eight-year useful life of these assets. While the eight-year depreciation period
extends beyond the expiration of the franchise agreement on February 28, 1996,
notification to the refuse collector as to whether the option for five additional years
will, or will not, be exercised by the District must be given by March 1, 1994;
therefore, prior to March ,1, 1994, the City of Lafayette and the Town of Danville
will be consulted to determine their plans regarding assumption of the franchise
agreement, and the method by which the refuse collector may recover the loss, if
any, between the book value and market value of the capital equipment through
collection rates set in 1994 and 1995.
. Restructuring the drop box rates to allow for full cost recovery will be considered
by the Board after the Acme Transfer Station fee is adjusted in mid-1992. We will
be better able to ascertain what full cost recovery for drop boxes is at that time.
" t ";
Mayor Tatzin
Page 3
February 4, 1992
. The City recommended that intercompany charges, in the absence of supporting
documentation, be denied. The Board allowed $250,000 in intercompany charges
after reviewing the nature and amount of the expense reductions and services
claimed to have been received by the refuse collector from the parent company.
. The City requested that justification for the increase in general administrative costs
be obtained. The District staff reviewed all major expense increases, including
general and administrative expenses, and made a number of rate adjustments. The
expense increases were considered necessary due to the additional staff that has
been added to Valley Waste Management recently because of AB 939 programs,
and to a certain extent, for the increase in the size of their operation.
. The City indicated that there is no economic incentive for Valley Waste
Management to implement alternative disposal programs.
Valley Waste
Management has implemented, at the District's request, the "POD" program and
an automated collection program in this area. While community response to the
POD program was such that we will not be pursuing it, we will be implementing
the automated collection service to the advantage of rate payers commencing later
in this fiscal year. Valley Waste Management was also able to provide a cheaper
disposal alternative than current disposal costs at the transfer station for yard
wastes which are to be picked-up separately as part of the automated collection
program.
Mayor Tatzin
Page 4
February 4, 1992
. The City indicated that it is opposed to making automated service mandatory.
However, it is impractical on the same route to have some individuals receive
automated collection services and others not. It will be necessary to implement
automated collection throughout the City of Lafayette in order for rate payers to
receive the $1.45 decrease in their collection rates. Of course, some areas that
are currently served by special service vehicles, due to topography, will continue
to have to be served by special purpose vehicles after automated service is
implemented. The District has requested that the Lafayette City Council make a
determination with regard to automated service by the end of February so that it
is known whether the refuse collector will have to order equipment or not for the
City of Lafayette. The Council should realize that in two different pilot programs
in the District, individuals have been very favorably inclined to automated service,
even in cases where initially there was opposition to the automated collection.
Thank you again for your input into our rate setting process. We have tried to consider
each of your suggestions and have done so in many cases. We look forward to hearing
from you regarding automated collection service in the City of Lafayette.
Sincerely,
Parke L. Boneysteele, President
Board of Directors
PLB/hb
ADS/Morsenl3/T atzin.ltr
DRAFT
February 4, 1992
Mr. Richard G. Heggie, Mayor,
and City Council Members
City of Orinda
26 Orinda Way
orinda, CA 94563
Dear Mayor Heggie and Council Members:
Thank you for providing input from your Council on the rate
application submitted by orinda-Moraga Disposal Service. Our Board
noted receipt of your letter dated January 17, 1992 and carefully
considered your Council's comments during the District's January
30, 1992 public hearing to establish refuse collection rates
effective January 1, 1992. I would like to address your comments
based on the results of the public hearing:
1. We have noted that your Council does not have any comment on
the closure cost assessment.
Our Board approved the staff
recommendation to defer consideration until the County
actually implements the assessment program.
Council's Comment:
DRAFT
Mayor Richard G. Heggie and Council Members
Page 2
February 4, 1992
2. Your Council points out that collection and disposal rates in
Orinda are among the highest in the Bay Area, and you urge the
District to continue to seek ways to minimize the rate of
increase.
Response:
The contributing factors your Council acknowledges as the
cause for escalating rates are accurate. Unfortunately, the
District's Board has no authority over disposal rates, the
largest contributing factor in escalating rates. However, the
Board is commi tted to continuing to seek ways to contain
collection costs. One example of this effort is the Board's
decision to complete the implementation (3-year phase-in) of
the uniform per can rate, which resulted in a lower 5.2
percent increase for one-can customers, whereas, the overall
increase approved is 9.87 percent.
Additionally, our
accounting staff performs a thorough analysis of each rate
application to ensure that every request is justifiable.
Council's Comment:
3. Your Council indicated that it cannot express support for a
rate increase in excess of the staff recommendations.
[ ,~ rr ~"~ ',:,~ t"0_
':; ~-::_ l .~ h' ~
Mayor Richard G. Heggie and Council Members
Page 2
February 4, 1992
ResDonse:
I'm sure your Council will be pleased that our Board approved
the staff recommended increase.
Again, thank you for your Council's input.
Sincerely,
Parke L. Boneysteele, President
Board of Directors
PLB:dk
ADS/Jacobs #2/Heggie.Ltr
~
~j
,
February 4, 1992
Mr. Ross Hubbard, Town Manager
Town of Moraga
P.O. Box 188
Moraga, CA 94556
Dear Ross:
Thank you for providing input from your Council to our Board
regarding the rate application submitted by orinda-Moraga Disposal
Service. Our Board noted receipt of your letter dated January 27,
1992 and carefully considered your Council's comments during the
District's January 30 pUblic hearing to establish refuse collection
rates effective January 1, 1992.
I would like to address your
comments based on the results of the rate setting:
1. Town of Moraqa's Comment:
That the Central San staff recommendation be approved.
ResDonse:
The staff's recommendation was approved.
The overall rate
increase approved is 9.87 percent.
2. Town of Moraqa's Comment:
~"'.. .
That a lower amount of depreciation should be included in next
year's increases.
ResPonse:
The collector is allowed a depreciation expense based on
capital costs. The staff-computed method of depreciation was
reviewed and approved for rate-setting purposes. The District
Board is mindful of the large capi tal expendi tures that
Collectors have had to make to implement the AB 939 required
diversions of garbage.
3. Town of Moraga's Comment:
That the District or OM Disposal should work toward a goal of
equalizing the cost of solid waste disposal closer to the
costs charged by other communities in the Bay Area.
ResPonse:
The major contributing factor is escalating rates is the
disposal fee, which is regulated by the Board of Supervisors.
Although the District's Board has no authority over disposal
fees, we are continually seeking ways to contain collection
costs. One example of this effort is the Board's decision to
complete the implementation (three-year phase-in) of the
uniform per can rate, which resulted in a lower 4.6 percent
~
increase for one-can customers, while the overall increase is
9.87 percent.
4. Town of Moraaa's Comment:
That rather than including capital improvements or other major
expenditures into the rate, set a rate for operating costs
with a surcharge added for the payment of capital costs, so
that capital costs do not continue in the rate analysis in
future years.
Response:
Capital costs are amortized over the useful life of the
equipment. As stated in all preceding comments, the collector
is allowed an annual depreciation expense over the
amortization period. There is no large initial capital outlay
that is reflected in the rates.
Again, thank you for your Council's input.
sincerely,
Parke L. Boneysteele
President, Board of Directors
PLB:dk
ADS/Jacobs#2/Hubbardl.ltr
PAGE OF 5
BOARD MEETING OF
February 6, 1992
NO.
4. BIDS AND AWARDS a.
AWARD THE MT. DIABLO SIPHON SLlPLlNING PROJECT,
DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 4535B, TO D'ARCY AND HARTY
CONSTRUCTION INC. AND AUTHORIZE A CONTINGENCY
ALLOCATION OF $152,000
DATE
January 29, 1992
TYPE OF ACTION
SUBJECT
AUTHORIZE AWARD
AUTHORIZE ALLOCATION
SUBMITTED BY
Rey I. Limjoco
Assistant Engineer
INITIATING DEPT.lDIV.
Engineering Department/
Infrastructure Division
ISSUE: On January 29, 1992, bids for construction of the Mt. Diablo Siphon Sliplining
Project, District Project No. 4535B, were opened. The Board of Directors must authorize
award of the contract or reject bids within 50 days of the opening of bids. Board of
Directors' authorization is required for Capital Improvement Program contingency allocations
for amounts greater than $25,000.
BACKGROUND: The existing 36-inch Main Interceptor No.1, which passes through the
heart of downtown Walnut Creek, has insufficient capacity to convey current peak wet-
weather flows from the San Ramon Valley. To address the capacity limitation, the District
has constructed the Walnut Creek Downtown Bypass (Bypass), which will convey the flow
from the San Ramon Valley Interceptor around downtown Walnut Creek and connect to the
existing and future A-Lines.
As originally envisioned, the Bypass was only to be used to divert high wet-weather flow
from the existing Main Trunk No.1 at Rudgear Road. The new sewer has not been activated
to date. Recent analysis by staff of flow routing in the Walnut Creek area has indicated that
a revised flow routing scheme in this area that involves year round operation of the Bypass
would have several desirable benefits. These benefits include greater operational flexibility
and reduced maintenance expenditures, the elimination of several capacity restrictions, and
the deferral of several large capacity expansion projects. To accomplish year round
operation of the Bypass, it is necessary to reduce the size of one of the two 42-inch siphon
barrels at Mt. Diablo Boulevard to sustain adequate cleansing velocity during periods of low
flow.
This project consists of sliplining approximately 400 linear feet of existing 42-inch diameter
siphon pipe with a 24-inch diameter liner pipe at Mt. Diablo Boulevard in Walnut Creek
(Attachment 1). The slipliner will be a temporary facility, which is expected to be
operational for approximately seven years at which time flows will have increased to the
point where the slipliner is no longer needed and, thus, will be removed.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
1302A-7/91
RIL
TJP
JSM
RAB
~
pAl
fi9J5
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
SUBJECT
.. ......................................-.....................,--.-,...-_..
............................................................... ....,",-,-."."""
....IIB.'II.II......ml.m.S.B.....
AWARD THE MT. DIABLO SIPHON SLlPLlNING PROJECT,
DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 4535B, TO D'ARCY AND HARTY
CONSTRUCTION, INC. AND AUTHORIZE A CONTINGENCY
ALLOCATION OF $152,000
PAGE 2 OF
DATE
5
January 30, 1992
Plans and specifications for the project were prepared by James M. Montgomery Consulting
Engineers, Inc. (JMM). The engineer's estimate for construction is $80,000. Bids for the
project were originally received on December 10, 1991. These bids ranged from $43,000
to $105,700. Due to bid complications, the Board of Directors rejected all bids at its
January 9, 1992 meeting. The project was readvertised on January 17 and 24, 1992.
Three sealed bids ranging from $58,400 to $84,175 were received and publicly opened on
January 29, 1992. A summary of the bids received is shown in Attachment 2.
The Engineering Department conducted a technical and commercial review of the bids and
concluded that the lowest responsible bidder is D'Arcy and Harty Construction Inc. for the
amount of $58,400.
The total project budget for this project is $152,000, as shown In Attachment 3. The
concept of year-round operation of the Bypass was developed as a result of several on-going
projects; and, therefore, this project was not anticipated In the 1991-92 Capital
Improvement Budget. Staff is recommending a contingency allocation to fund the project.
Staff has determined that this project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEOAl under District CEOA Guidelines, Section 18.2, since it involves minor alterations
to an existing sewerage facility with negligible or no expansion of capacity. The Board of
Directors' approval of this project will constitute a finding of agreement with this
determination unless otherwise indicated.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Authorize award of contract In the amount of $ 58,400 to D' Arcy and Harty
Construction I nc., as the lowest responsible bidder.
2. Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to allocate $152,000 from the
Collection System Contingency Account.
13028-7/91
~
.~
I w
u...
< "
x (/) ...
f z 0
0 CD
J: ~
a.. w
(/) ...J
Z
~--::
~-
f"
~
Zx
Ww
~...J
~o.
CI:~
<0
0.0
<
I
I
I
~ .
(/)
...J
W
CI:
CI:
<
CD
Z
o
J:
a.
en
J:
o
Z
C\l
~
'z
<(
-1
a..
Page 3 of 5
...
Zr
W
::E
o ,..
~
~
...
(J
w
..,
o
a:
~
CJ
z
Z
::J
e:
..J
en
z CD
o it)
:x: M
~ ~
en ~
o Q
..J
CD
c(
C
.
...
:E
D
-
.-
D.!!
Ub
~;S
-
C~
D~
U_
,1.-
~C
_0
ecn
.
U
A.
~
::E
i
C;
:;:
PROJECT NO.
ATTACHMENT 2 Page 4 of 5
Centr,- .. ~Jntra Costa Sar~_.ar-)' District
SUMMARY DF BIDS
Mt. Diablo Siphon
Sliplinin9 Project
45358
DATE January 29. 1992
ENGR. EST.~ 80,000
LOCATION
Mt. Diablo Boulevard, Walnut Creek
-
J!7=
\ :z:
,
.,
BIDDER (Name, telephone & address)
BID PRle.
D'Arcy and Harty ( 415) 586-4000 $
1 Construction Inc.
425 Monterey Boulevard, San Francisco, CA 94127 58,400
i-- .. .~
D.W. Young Construction Co., ( 510) 837-0724 $ I
. 2 General tnglneerlng Cont. Inc. 94526 65,800
140-A Town and Country Drive
- Danville. -CA
Performance Mechanical ( 510) 432-4080 $
3 P.O. Box 1516, 630 w. Tenth Street 94565 84,175
Pittsburq, CA
( ) $
i--
( ) $
( ) $
~
{ ) '$"
( ) $
-
( ) $
( ) $ I
-
( ) $
( ) $
BIDS OPENED BY
Joyce Murphy
DATE
1/29/92
SHEET NO.
1
OF
1
2S0)-1I/54
Page 5 of 5
ATTACHMENT 3
MT. DIABLO SIPHON SLlPLlNING PROJECT
DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 4535B
POST-BID. PRECONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
PERCENT OF
ITEM DESCRIPTION TOTAL CONSTRUCTION
CONTRACT
COSTS
1 Construction Contract $ 58,400
2 Contingency (at 25 percent) 14,600
SUBTOTAL $ 73,000 100
3 Force Account
Ma nagementl Ad ministration $ 4,000
Inspection 9,500
Collection System Operations Dept. 500
Legal 500
Engineering 2,000
Consultant (James M. Montgomery) 9,000
SUBTOTAL $ 25,500 34.9
4 Miscellaneous
Permit $ 1,000
Community Relations 1,500
As-Builts 1,000
SUBTOTAL $ 3,500 4.8
5 Prebid Expenditures $ 50,000 68.5
6 TOTAL PROJECT COST $152,000 208.2
7 Funds Previously Allocated 1 0
8 Total Allocation of Funds Required to $152,000
Complete Project
'Design funds were allocated under the Near Court Project.
PAGE 1
OF 3
NO.
SUBJECT
5. ADMINISTRATIVE a.
DATE January 31, 1992
ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO REVISE THE LIST OF
EMPLOYEES AUTHORIZED TO HAVE ACCESS TO THE
DISTRICT'S SAFE DEPOSIT BOX
TYPE OF ACTION
ADOPT RESOLUTION
SUBMITTED BY
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Walter Funasaki, Finance Officer
Administrative/Finance & Accounting
ISSUE: Board authorization is required to add James M. Desurne, Accounting Technician, and
delete Deborah D. Hinkson, Accountant, from the list of employees having access to the
District's safe deposit box.
BACKGROUND: The District maintains a safe deposit box at the Wells Fargo Bank in Pleasant
Hill to safeguard developer bonds which are in the form of certificates of deposit. A designated
Accounting staff member is given responsibility to deposit and withdraw such bonds, and to
maintain records and receipts which serve as an inventory of the contents of the safe deposit
box.
Employees currently authorized to have access to the safe deposit box are:
Joyce E. Murphy, Secretary of the District
Walter N. Funasaki, Finance Officer
Deborah D. Hinkson, Accountant
Colette S. Curtis-Brown, Accountant
Colette S. Curtis-Brown is the staff member presently assigned custodial responsibility for the
safe deposit box, and Deborah D. Hinkson is the alternate custodian. It is considered desirable
to assign James M. Desurne, Accounting Technician, the custodial responsibilities, and to have
Colette Curtis-Brown provide coverage in James Desurne's absence.
A resolution to authorize James M. Desurne access to the District's safe deposit box and to
remove Deborah D. Hinkson from the list of employees having such access is attached; the
resulting list of employees will be as follows:
Joyce E. Murphy, Secretary of the District
Walter N. Funasaki, Finance Officer
Colette S. Curtis-Brown, Accountant
James M. Desurne, Accounting Technician
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the attached resolution to add James M. Desurne to, and to delete
Deborah D. Hinkson from, the list of employees authorized access to the District's safe deposit
box.
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
1302A-7/91
WNF PM
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 85-093 AND AUTHORIZING
THE SECRETARY OF THE DISTRICT, FINANCE OFFICER,
ACCOUNTANT, AND ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN AS SIGNATORIES
AND KEYHOLDERS FOR THE DISTRICT SAFE DEPOSIT BOX
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District,
a public corporation (hereinafter referred to as Corporation), as follows:
THAT, this Corporation has entered into a Rental Agreement (and renewals thereof) for
a Safe Deposit Box in the vaults of Wells Fargo Bank (hereinafter called Bank); and
THAT, anyone of the following officers and employees of this Corporation shall have the
right of access to, and control of, the contents thereof, and to surrender the said Box, releasing
Bank from all liability with respect thereto:
Joyce E. Murphy, Secretary of the District
Walter N. Funasaki, Finance Officer
Colette S. Curtis-Brown, Accountant
James M. Desurne, Accounting Technician
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the certification of the Secretary of this Corporation as
to election or appointment of authorized officers or employees shall be binding upon this
Corporation, and the authority hereby conferred shall remain in force until written notice of the
revocation or modification thereof shall be delivered to an officer of Bank at the office at which
said Safe Deposit Box is located.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of February, 1992, by the District Board of the
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District by the following vote:
AYES:
Members:
NO:
Members:
ABSENT:
Members:
President of the Board of Directors,
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District,
County of Contra Costa, State of California
COUNTERSIGNED:
Secretary of the Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa,
State of California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Kenton L. Aim
District Counsel
~.""":-:-.'.:-~-'~';::"~
ADS/PosPap#1/SafDep.PP
~ Ct>,ltral Contra Costa San it..., y District
III BOARD OF DIRECTORS r PAGE 1 OF ')()
POSITION PAPER BOARD ~~E~aa>ry 6, 1992 NO.
9. BUDGET AND FINANCE a.
SUBJECT DATE February 3, 1992
RECEIVE THE 1 991-1 992 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
BUDGET REVIEW FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED TYPE OF ACTION
DECEMBER 31, 1 991 RECEIVE BUDGET
REVIEW
SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Walter N. Funasaki, Finance Officer Administrative/Finance & Accounting
ISSUE: A report of the results of a comparative review of actual and budgeted Operations and
Maintenance (O&M) revenues and expenses for the first six months of the 1991-1 992 fiscal year
is provided in this Position Paper.
BACKGROUND: A comparison of actual and budgeted District O&M revenues and expenses for
the six months ended December 31, 1 991 , and projected revenues and expenses for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1992 is summarized below:
Six Months Ended December 31. 1991 Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1992
Variance Variance
Favorable < Unfavorable> Favorable < U favorable>
Actual Budget Amount % Projected Budget Amount %
Revenues
Sewer Service
Charges $10,358,009 10.437,850 < 79.841 > < 0.8> 20,599.400 20.322,500 276,900 1.4
City of Concord 988,990 965,000 23,990 2.5 4,000,000 4,504,000 <504,000> <11.2>
Other 1 ,033.480 1,252,650 <219,170> <17.5> 1,803,700 2,122,100 <318,400> <15.0>
Total Revenues 12,380.479 12,655,500 <275,021 > <2.2> 26.403,100 26,948,600 <545,500> <2.0>
Expenses
Administrative 2,041,079 2,176,089 135,010 6.2 4,173,337 4,182,943 9,606 0.2
Engineering 1,649,905 1,635,809 <14,096> <0.9> 3,530,106 3.467,341 < 62,765> < 1.8>
Collection
System Opers. 2,138,216 2,354,658 216,442 9.2 4,592,679 4,797,033 204,354 4.3
Plant Opers. 6,134,327 6.474,752 340.425 5.3 12,527,103 1 3,076.433 549,330 4.2
Pumping Stn's 721,647 742,912 21,265 2.9 1,536,336 1,448,757 < 87,579> <6.0>
Total Expenses 12,685,174 13,384,220 699,046 5.2 26,359,561 26,972,507 612,946 2.3
Surplus < Deficit> $ <304,695> <728,720> 424,025 58.2 43,539 < 23,907 > 67.446
Reserves-End of Year (Beginning of Year Reserves as of June 30, 1991 is $1,914,8121:
$1,958,351
-- REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION A
INITIATING DEPT./DIV. r " -ml~NG_
/' ~l
~~A . ~
....
1302A-7/91 WNF pt 7 ROGER J. DOLAN
SUBJECT
...................................................................................
...................................................................................
.:..111111111::::1111111.1
...................................................'..............................................................................................................,"
RECEIVE THE 1991-1992 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
BUDGET REVIEW FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 1991
PAGE
DATE
2 OF 20
February 3, 1992
Based on the results of the first six months of the 1991-1992 fiscal year, projections have been
made of revenues and expenses for the full fiscal year. District revenues are projected to total
$26,403,100 for the fiscal year, which are $545,500 or 2.0 percent, lower than budgeted
revenues of $26,948,600. Explanations of major variances between projected, or actual,
revenues and budgeted revenues for the fiscal year and the six month period are presented in
Attachment I.
District expenses are projected to be $26,359,561 for the fiscal year, which are less than
budgeted expenses of $26,972,507 by $613,446 or 2.3 percent. Variances between projected,
or actual, expenses and budgeted expenses for the fiscal year and the six month period are
described by major expense categories on Attachment II. Explanations of major overexpended
or underexpended accounts are provided by department on Attachment III.
RECOMMENDATIONS: Receive the 1991-1992 Operations and Maintenance Budget Review
for the six months ended December 31, 1991, and provide comments and guidance to District
staff.
ADS/Pos Pap#1/6MOO&M.Frm
13028-7/91
Attachment I
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT
REVENUE ACCOUNT VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS
FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1991
AND FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1992
Six Months Ended o-nber 31, 1991 Fisc8I V_ EncIng June 30, 1992
VBriBnce VBriBnce
FlIVorabIe < Unfavorable > Favorable < Unfavorable >
ActuBI Budget Amount % Projected Budget Amount %
Sewer Service
Cherge ( 11 $10,358,009 10,437,850 < 79,841 > < 0.8> 20,599,400 20,322,500 276,900 1.4
Service Charges -
Concord ( 2) 988,990 965,000 23,990 2.5 4,000,000 4,504,000 <504,000> <11.2>
House Connection
Inspection Fees ( 31 26,934 35,800 < 8,866> < 24.8 > 53,400 69,000 < 15,600> <22.6>
Septic Tank
Dumping ( 41 29,886 44,000 < 14,114> <32.1 > 60,700 88,000 < 27,300> <31.0>
Industrial Permit
Fees (51 31,062 52,700 < 21,638> <41.1> 99,200 145,000 < 45,800> <31.6>
New Industry
Permit Fees (6) 65,038 38,900 26,138 67.2 119,700 88,000 31,700 36.0
Franchise Fees ( 71 495,844 640,000 < 144,156> < 22.5 > 578,200 640,000 < 61,800> < 9.7>
Lease Rental
Income ( 81 67,256 82,400 < 15,144> <18.4> 143,700 169,100 < 25,300> <15.0>
Reclaimed Water
Sales (91 177,677 135,000 42,677 31.6 278,000 270,000 8,000 3.0
Interest Income (10) 65.831 152.300 < 86,469 > <56.8> 257.700 421.000 <163.300> <38.8>
12,306,527 12,583,950 <277,423> < 2.2> 26,190,000 26,716,500 <526,500> < 2.0>
All Other Accounts 73.952 71,550 2,402 3.4 213.100 232,100 < 19.000> < 8.2>
Total Revenues $12.380.479 12,655.500 <275,021 > ~ 26,403,100 26.948.600 <545.500> ~
Variance EXDlanations:
( 1) Sewer Service Charges for the first six month period were $79,841 less than budget as a result of
lower than anticipated counter collections due to the continuing reduced activity in the housing
construction industry and larger than anticipated refunds of prior years' charges. Although
construction activity is anticipated to continue at reduced levels, additional revenues resulting from
adjustments to commercial accounts and apartments are projected to produce revenues for the fiscal
year which are $276,900 higher than budget.
( 2) Service Charges - Concord were $23,990 over budget for the first six month period; the payment
recorded in the first six months merely represents an advance payment of one-half of the billing for
the last half of the prior fiscal year. Projected revenues for the fiscal year are $504,000 less than
budget as a result of the combined effect of a lower than budgeted flow factor for the City of
Concord, and projected underexpenditures in Plant Operations Department operations and maintenance
expenses.
3
( 3) House Connection Inspec.."n Fees were $8,866 less than bU~det for the first six month period
primarily due to lower than anticipated activity in the housing construction industry. Projected
revenues for the fiscal year are $15,600 less than budget as a result of the continued effect of the
underrealization of the first six months.
( 4) Septic Tank Dumping revenues were $14,114 less than budget for the first six month period primarily
due to a lower than anticipated number of waste loads delivered for treatment. Projected revenues
for the fiscal year are $27,300 less than budget as a result of the continued trend of the first six
months.
( 5) Industrial Permit Fees revenues were $21,638 less than budget for the first six month period primarily
due to a delay in the receipt of a series of State Water Resource Control Board grant payments being
delayed as the grant has not yet been finalized and approved. The delay in the start of the series of
grant payments is the primary reason that projected revenues for the fiscal year are $45,800 less than
budget.
(6) New Industry Permit Fees revenues for the first six month period were $26,138 higher than budget
primarily due to larger than anticipated special billings to East Bay M.U. D. and Acme Fill for processing
filter backwash and leachate, respectively. Projected revenues for the fiscal year are $31,700 higher
than budget.
( 7) Franchise Fees are billed to franchised refuse collectors annually in the first six month period based
on a projection of District expenses to administer the franchise agreements, with an adjustment
recorded in June to reflect a revised projection. The projected fees for the fiscal year are less than
budget by $61,800, reflecting lower than anticipated administrative expenses incurred related to
refuse collection rate-setting and other solid waste issues.
( 8) Lease Rental Income revenues for the first six month period were $15,144 less than budget primarily
due to three tenants of the Imhoff Place light industrial complex terminating their leases sooner than
anticipated. As a result, projected revenues for the fiscal year are $25,300 less than budget.
( 9) Reclaimed Water Sales for the first six month period were $42,677 higher than budget. Projected
revenues for the fiscal year are $8,000 higher than budget as more reclaimed water payments were
received during the first six month period than anticipated, and less than budgeted receipts are
projected in the second half of the fiscal year.
(10) Interest Income for the first six month period is $86,469 less than budget primarily due to lower than
anticipated interest rates and lower inter-fund balances on which interest income is based. Revenues
for the fiscal year are projected to be $163,300 less than budget because of the continued trend of
the first six months.
ADS/Budget#1 /6MoO&M.A 1
4
Attachment II
CENTRAL CONTRA COST A SANITARY DISTRICT
SUMMARY OF ACTUAL AND BUDGETED O&M EXPENSES BY EXPENSE CATEGORY
FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31,1991 AND THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30,1992
Six Months Ended Decellbtr 31, 1991 Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1992
Variance Variance
Favorable (Unfavorable) Favorable (Unfavorable)
Expense Category
Actual
Budget
Amc:u'It
x
Projected
Budget
Amol.l"lt
x
Labor & Eq)loyee
Benefits (1) $9,524,990 9,751,657 226,667 2.3 19,648,917 19,988,744 339,827 1.7
Utilties (2) 1,584,818 1,795,169 210,351 11.7 3,210,771 3,602,503 391,732 10.9
Chemicals (3) 567,613 559,578 (8,035) (20.5) 1,166,740 1,147,116 (19,624) (1.7>
Repairs & Maint. (4) 685,781 844,440 158,659 18.8 1,542,694 1,680,546 137,852 8.2
Hauling & Disposal (5) 176,521 169,283 <7,238) (4.3) 387,753 407,295 19,542 4.8
Prof. & Legal Servo (6) 177,666 141,016 (36,650) (11.7> 325,800 289,004 (36,796) (12.7>
Outside Services (7) 794,563 1,023,542 228,979 22.4 1,658,336 1,632,923 (25,413) ( 1.6)
Materials & Supplies (8) 495,491 528,307 32,816 6.2 1,085,259 1,101,997 16,738 1.5
All Other 361,262 368,038 6,776 1.8 743,796 721,246 (22,550) (3.1)
------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------
Total District
Expenses 14,368,705 15,181,030 812,325 5.4 29,770,066 30,571,374 801,308 2.6
Total Capitalized
Expenses (9) (1,683,523) (1,796,809) (113,286) (6.3) (3,410,505) (3,598,867) (188,362) (5.2)
-----------------------------------------------. ------------------------.-----------------------
Net Oistrict
Expenses $12,685,182 13,384,221 699 ,039 5.2 26,359,561 26,972,507 612,946 2.3
------------------------------------------------ ================================================
------------------------------------------------
Variance EXDlanations:
(1) labor and Employee Benefits:
The favorable variances of $226,667 for the six month period, and $339,827
projected for the fiscal year are primarily the result of unfilled authorized staff
positions in the Administrative, Collection System Operations, and Plant Operations
Departments.
(2) Utilities:
The favorable variances of $210,351 for the six month period, and $391,732
projected for the fiscal year are primarily the result of a favorable variance in the
Plant Operations Department's landfill gas expense due to lower gas usage, offset
5
by an unfavorable variance in natural gas expense from higher than anticipated
usage.
(3) Chemicals:
The minor unfavorable variances of $8,035 for the six month period, and $19,624
projected for the fiscal year are primarily the result of greater than anticipated use
of lime and other chemicals in the wastewater collection and treatment processes.
(4) Repairs and Maintenance:
The favorable variances of $158,659 for the six month period, and $137,856
projected for the fiscal year are primarily the result of delays in certain collection
system repair work due to a greater than anticipated level of work on capital
projects.
(5) Hauling and Disposal:
The minor unfavorable variance of $7,238 for the six month period, and favorable
variance of $19,542 projected for the fiscal year are primarily the result of
unanticipated additional janitorial services and window washing in the plant
complex during the first six month period, offset by a projected reduced level of
sludge removal during the second six month period.
(6) Professional and Legal Services:
The unfavorable variances of $36,650 for the six month period, and $36,796
projected for the fiscal year are primarily the result of a greater than anticipated
need for labor counsel services related to arbitrations, and legal services related to
solid waste matters.
(7) Outside Services:
The favorable variance of $228,979 for the six month period, and unfavorable
variance of $24,856 projected for the fiscal year are primarily the result of the
following departmental explanations:
Administrative
Other Public Agency Services expense is $119,459 underexpended for the
six month period primarily due to a delay in the billing by the Contra Costa
County of its 1991-1992 ad valorem tax administration fee; this account is
projected to be $5,000 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Recruitment expense is $16,757 underexpended for the first six month
period and is projected to be $26,000 underexpended for the fiscal year
primarily because of a lesser use of personnel recruiting firms than budgeted
and deferring on-campus college recruitment.
6
Enaineerina
Technical Services expense is lower than budget for the first six month
period by $85,734 and is projected to be $39,700 underexpended for the
fiscal year, primarily because consulting services for two studies were
deferred from the first half of the fiscal year to the second half.
Collection System Ooerations
Technical Services expense is $47,683 overexpended for the first six month
period and is projected to be $68,000 overexpended for the fiscal year
primarily because of increased use of temporary agency personnel; a
temporary truck driver is required to haul reclaimed water because of the
drought, and temporary personnel will be needed for unfilled staff positions.
The unfilled staff positions are reflected in the favorable variance in the
Salaries and Wages and related employee benefits expenses.
Plant Ooerations
Outside Safety Services expense is $19,729 overexpended for the first six
month period and is projected to be $11 ,000 overexpended for the fiscal
year, primarily because of the use of an outside safety contractor during the
period since the retirement of the Plant Safety Specialist and the hiring of
a replacement. Additional unanticipated expenses are projected during the
fiscal year for disposal of hazardous lab waste, and safety equipment
inspection and certification.
(9) Total Capitalized Expenses:
The unfavorable variances of $113,286 for the six month period, and $118,362
projected for the fiscal year are primarily the result of a lower than anticipated level
of Engineering Department staff effort applied to capital projects as a result of
capital projects occurring later in the fiscal year than anticipated, and less
inspection of developer-installed sewer lines than planned, owing to the continued
slowdown in construction activity.
ADS/Budget# 1 /6moO&M .Sum
7
Attachment III
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT
EXPENSE ACCOUNT VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED
DECEMBER 31. 1991
ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENT
Six Months Review:
The departmental operations and maintenance expenses for the six months ended
December 31. 1991 totaled $2.041,079 and were $135,010 less than budgeted
expenses of $2,176,089. The 6.2 percent underexpenditure is primarily the result of the
following expense account variances:
Salaries and Wages and related employee benefits expenses of $1,330,203 are
$20,901 less than budgeted expenses of $1,351,104 for the six month period
primarily because of open positions being filled later than anticipated in Finance
and Accounting, Personnel/Graphics, Purchasing, and Risk Management and
Safety.
These accounts are projected to be $30,712 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Telephone expense of $23,200 is $6,160 higher than budgeted expense of
$17,040 for the six month period primarily because of the expansion of the
District's telephone system to a portion of the new industrial property occupied by
district personnel, and the addition of five trunk lines to service the outlying
buildings at the Walnut Creek Collection System Operations site.
This account is project to be $3,216 overexpended for the fiscal year.
Outside Repairs and Maintenance expense of $27,357 is $5,457 higher than
budgeted expense of $21,900 for the six month period primarily because of
unanticipated repairs to the Home Office Building dumbwaiter, and to relocate the
fire alarm control panel, after it was damaged in a flooding incident, to prevent any
future occurrence.
This account is projected to be equivalent to budget for the fiscal year.
Janitorial and Refuse Removal expense of $16,536 is $2,964 less than budgeted
expense of $19,500 for the six month period primarily because window cleaning
scheduled in December was deferred until January due to rain.
This account is projected to be $3,000 underexpended for the fiscal year.
8
Legal Services - Board expense of $17,187 is $4,687 higher than budgeted
expense of $12,500 for the six month period primarily because of legal expense
incurred to evaluate whether a conflict of interest issue existed for a Board
Member.
This account is projected to be $6,000 overexpended for the fiscal year.
Legal Services - Staff expense of $74,461 is $35,541 higher than budgeted
expense of $38,920 for the six month period primarily due to: unanticipated
expense for a specialized legal review of an investment services agreement with
Contra Costa County covering District funds held in trust by the County; solid
waste matters related to implementation of AB 939 requirements; negotiations
regarding the Acme Transfer Station; and labor counsel fees in connection with
labor arbitrations.
This account is projected to be $38,000 overexpended for the fiscal year.
Outside Safety Services expense of $7,715 is $8,085 less than budgeted expense
of $15,800 for the six month period primarily because of the necessity to hire and
train new safety personnel, thus requiring the rescheduling of industrial hygiene
monitoring and disaster program planning services to the next six months.
This account is projected to be $6,000 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Other Public Agency Services expense $54,441 is $119,459 less than budgeted
expense of $173,900 for the six month period primarily due to a delay in the billing
by the Contra Costa County of its 1991-1992 ad valorem tax administration fee,
and the County's fee for collecting the District's Sewer Service Charges on the
property tax rolls being $8,600 less than budgeted.
This account is projected to be $5,000 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Reprographic Services expense of $23,586 is $12,781 higher than budgeted
expense of $10,805 for the six month period primarily because of the expense of
reprinting stationery and forms necessitated by the change in the telephone area
code; additionally, the printing of the labor agreement handbooks for the two
representation groups was budgeted in 1 990-1 991 , but due to lateness in reaching
settlement with one group, occurred in this fiscal year.
This account is projected to be $11,000 overexpended for the fiscal year.
Recruitment expense of $21,743 is $16,757 less than budgeted expense of
$38,500 for the six month period primarily because of a lesser level of use of
personnel recruiting firms than budgeted, and deferring on-campus college
recruitment.
9
This account is projected to be $26,000 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Bindery Services, Press and Camera Services, Special Reprographic Services, and
Typesetting Services expense accounts are used to record the expense of printing
and graphic services performed by the Administrative Department's Graphics
Section for other departments, or are chargeable to capital projects. Such
apportionment of expenses, plus labor and benefits, are recorded in the user
department's Reprographic Services expense account or charged to capital project
accounts; the account which is used to offset such chargeouts within the
Administrative Department is the Reprographic Chargeouts account.
The combined net underexpenditure of $17, 123 for all four accounts, comprised
of expenses of $91,311 compared to budgeted expenses of $108,434, is the
result of less reprographic requirements. for solid waste publications than
anticipated during the six month period.
These accounts are projected to be $3,000 underexpended on a combined basis
for the fiscal year.
Office Expense of $34,847 is $10,112 higher than budgeted expense of $24,735
for the six month period primarily because of higher than anticipated postage usage
during the first half of the fiscal year for mailings related to solid waste
administration, personnel recruitment, and Environmental Impact Report letters and
documents.
This account is projected to be equivalent to budget for the fiscal year.
Rents and Leases expense of $17,427 is $4,357 higher than budgeted expense
of $13,070 for the six month period primarily because of higher than anticipated
copier usage, and the unbudgeted rental during a three-month trial period of a
laptop computer for the Records Retention System.
This account is projected to be $4,000 overexpended for the fiscal year.
Public Information expense of $61,288 is $20,312 less than budgeted expense of
$81,600 for the six month period primarily because of the deferral to the second
half of the fiscal year of one of two solid waste newsletters originally scheduled
for issuance during the first six month period.
This account is projected to be equivalent to budget for the fiscal year.
Technical Training, Conferences and Meetings expenses of $6,930 is $9,460 less
than budgeted expense of $16,390 for the six month period primarily because of
a lower level of training and conference meetings attended due to the following:
more in-depth training of certain Finance and Accounting personnel on the current
computer system has been canceled in view of the upgrade of the system now in
10
progress; fewer than scheduled conferences attended by the Personnel Officer due
to a pregnancy disability leave; and deferring a District-wide performance standards
workshop.
This account is projected to be $6,000 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Public Notices expense of $7,499 is $4,499 higher than budgeted expense of
$3,000 for the six month period primarily because of the need to publish special
notices to fill the vacancy on the Board of Directors, following the unscheduled
resignation. of a Board Member who moved out of the District's service area.
This account is projected to be $ 7 ,000 overexpended for the fiscal year.
Outside Organization Fees expense of $6,306 is $2,390 less than budgeted
expense of $8,696 for the six month period primarily because the CAS A
membership dues of $2,500, budgeted in December 1991, were billed and paid in
January 1992.
This account is projected to be equivalent. to budget for the fiscal year.
For all other individual departmental expense accounts, the actual expense for the
six month period did not vary more than $3,000 of budgeted expense.
The cumulative net variance between actual and budgeted expenses for all these
accounts for the fiscal year is projected to be $890 overexpended.
Fiscal Year Proiection:
The Administrative Department's operation and maintenance expenses are projected to
be $9,606 underexpended for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1992, as a net result of:
underexpenditures in Salaries and Wages and related employee benefits of $30,712,
Janitorial and Refuse Removal of $3,000, Outside Safety Services of $6,000, Other
Public Agency Services of $5,000, Recruitment of $26,000, the combined Bindery
Services, Press and Camera Services, Special Reprographic Services, and Typesetting
Services of $3,000, and Technical Training, Conference and Meetings of $6,000;
overexpenditures in Telephone of $3,216, Legal Services - Board of $6,000, Legal
Services - Staff of $38,000, Reprographic Services of $ 11,000, Rents and Leases of
$4,000, and Public Notices of $ 7 ,000; and the cumulative net variance between actual
and budgeted expense for all other accounts of $890 overexpended.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Six Months Review:
Departmental operations and maintenance expenses for the six months ended December
31, 1991 totaled $ 1,649,905 and were $ 1 4,096 higher than budgeted expenses of
11
$1,635,809. The.9 percent overexpenditure is primarily the result of the following
expense account variances:
Salaries and Wages and related employee benefits expenses of $2,680,114 are
$10,817 higher than budgeted expenses of $2,669,297 for the six month period
primarily because of the allocation of higher than budgeted employee benefits
expense charges.
These accounts are projected to be $100,931 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Outside Repairs and Maintenance expense of $6,294 is $1,949 higher than
budgeted expense of $4,345 for the six month period primarily because of the
unanticipated replacement of circuit boards for the City of Concord and Naval
Weapons Station flow monitoring data transmission equipment.
This account is projected to be $2,990 overexpended for the fiscal year.
Technical Services expense of $87,692 is $85,734 less than budgeted expense
of $173,426 for the six month period primarily because consulting services for two
studies, i.e. plastic pipe and residential heavy metals, will occur during the second
half of the fiscal year instead of the first.
This account is projected to be $39,700 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Reprographic Services expense of $6,884 is $3,821 less than budgeted expense
of $10,705 for the six month period primarily because the printing of the Standard
Specifications will occur during the second half of the fiscal year instead of the
first.
This account is projected to be $2,320 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Office Expense of $18,644 is $7,709 less than budgeted expense of $26,353 for
the six month period primarily because of deferring the purchasing of certain supply
items until a departmental reorganization, then in progress, is completed.
This account is projected to be equivalent to budget for the fiscal year.
Capitalized Salaries and Wages and related capitalized accounts of $1,269,275 are
$106,809 less than budgeted accounts of $1,376,084 for the six month period
primarily due to less staff hours charged to capital projects as a result of capital
projects occurring later in the fiscal year than anticipated, and less inspection of
developer-installed sewer lines than planned, owing to the continued slowdown in
construction activity.
These accounts are projected to be $197,747 underrealized for the fiscal year.
12
For all other individual departmental expense accounts, the actual expense for the
six month period did not vary more than $6,000 of budgeted expense.
The cumulative net variance between actual and budgeted expenses for all these
accounts for the fiscal year is projected to be $4,979 overexpended.
Fiscal Year Proiection:
The Engineering Department's operations and maintenance expenses are projected to be
$62,765 overexpended for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1992, as a net result of:
overexpenditure in Outside Repairs and Maintenance of $2,990; underrealization in
Capitalized Salaries and Wages and related capitalized accounts of $1 97,747;
underexpenditures in Salaries and Wages and related employee benefits of $100,931
Technical Services of $39,700, Reprographic Services of $2,320, and Office Expense of
$110; and a cumulative net overexpenditure of $4,979 in all other accounts.
COLLECTION SYSTEM OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT
Six Months Review:
Departmental operations and maintenance expenses for the six months ended December
31,1991 totaled $2,138,216, and were $216,442 less than budgeted expenses of
$2,354,658. The 9.2 percent underexpenditure is primarily the result of the following
expense account variances:
Salaries and Wages and related employee benefits expenses of $1,756,651 are
$75,569 less than budgeted expenses of $1,832,220 for the six month period
primarily because of unanticipated terminations and delays in filling vacant staff
positions.
These accounts are projects to be $101,778 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Outside Repairs and Maintenance expense of $77,353 is $60,673 less than
budgeted expense of $138,026 for the six month period primarily because of
delays in implementing a planned lateral abandonment program and letting
contracts for structure adjustments; the delay adjustments were due to greater
than anticipated level of work on capital projects, and emergency repair work on
the St. Mary's Right-of-Way Project.
This account is projected to be $70,000 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Spoils Removal expense of $24,024 is $5,484 higher than budgeted expense of
$18,540 for the six month period primarily due to removal of a greater volume of
accumulated spoils material than anticipated.
This account is projected to be $5,484 overexpended for the fiscal year.
13
Outside Safety Services expense of $6,047 is $8,706 less than budgeted expense
of $14,753 for the six month period primarily because of a delay in implementing
a physical injury prevention training program.
This account is projected to be $6,000 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Technical Services expense of $79,731 is $47,683 higher than budgeted expense
of $32,048 for the six month period primarily due to the use of temporary agency
personnel to fill vacant staff positions, and due to the continuing requirement to
haul recycled water from the Treatment Plant for sewer cleaning during the
drought. The overexpenditure in this account is offset by the underexpenditure in
Salaries and Wages and related employee benefits expenses.
This account is projected to be $68,000 overexpended for the fiscal year.
Operating Supplies expense of $155,788 is $28,150 less than budgeted expense
of $183,938 for the six month period primarily because of a higher than
anticipated level of work by construction crews on capital projects, and the
resulting deferral of planned repair activities.
This account is projected to be $34,500 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Safety Supplies expense of $11,353 is $4,145 less than budgeted expense of
$15,498 for the six month period primarily due to the deferral of a planned safety
incentive program.
This account is projected to be $8,000 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Rents and Leases expense of $18,522 is $17,724 less than budgeted expense of
$36,246 for the six month period primarily because of the higher than anticipated
level of work by construction crews on capital projects, and the resulting deferral
of repair activity; additionally, the use of rental equipment was less due to higher
than anticipated equipment availability.
This account is projected to be $14,200 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Technical Training, Conferences, and Meetings expense of $6,410 is $2,680 less
than budgeted expense of $9,090 for the six month period primarily because of the
deferral of training to the second half of the fiscal year.
This account is projected to be equivalent to budget for the fiscal year.
Capitalized Salaries and Wages and related capitalized accounts of $162,301 are
$60,394 greater than budgeted accounts of $101,907 for the six month period
primarily because of a higher than anticipated level of work by construction crews
on capital projects, including the St. Mary's Right-of-Way Project.
14
These accounts are projected to be $37,830 overrealized for the fiscal year.
For all other individual departmental expense accounts, the actual expense for the
six month period did not vary more than $4,000 of budgeted expense.
The cumulative net variance between actual and budgeted expenses for all these
accounts for the fiscal year is projected to be $5,530 underexpended.
Fiscal Year Proiection:
The Collection System Operations Department's operations and maintenance expenses
are projected to be $204,354 underexpended for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1992,
as a net result of: underexpenditures in Salaries and Wages and related employee
benefits of $101,778, Outside Repairs and Maintenance of $70,000, Outside Safety
Services of $6,000, Operating Supplies of $34,500, Safety Supplies of $8,000, and
Rents and Leases of $14,200; overrealization in Capitalized Salaries and Wages and
related capitalized accounts of $37,830; overexpenditures in Spoils Removal of $5,484,
and Technical Services of $68,000; and a cumulative net underexpenditure of $5,530
in all other accounts.
PLANT OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT
Six Months Review:
Departmental operations and maintenance expenses for the six months ended December
31, 1991 totaled $6,134,327, and were $340,425 less than budgeted expenses of
$6,474,752. The 5.3 percent underexpenditure is primarily the result of the following
expense account variances:
Salaries and Wages and related employee benefits expenses of $3,418,292 are
$151,031 less than budgeted expenses of $3,569,323 for the six month period
primarily because of a vacant position caused by a long-term disability, and filling
the Plant Safety Specialist position and other positions later than anticipated.
These accounts are projected to be $119,003 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Chlorine expense of $20,297 is $37,443 less than budgeted expense of $57,740
for the six month period primarily because of a significant reduction in the price of
chlorine obtained through the efforts of the District's Purchasing Section.
This account is projected to be $74,980 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Lime expense of $68,279 is $26,279 higher than budgeted expense of $42,000
for the six month period primarily because of a higher than anticipated volume of
lime usage, and an increase in the unit price of carbide lime.
15
This account is projected to be $19,000 overexpended for the fiscal year.
Polymer expense of $118,097 is $45,403 less than budgeted expense of
$163,500 for the six month period primarily because of lower than anticipated
usage of polymer in the production of reclaimed water, in the Dissolved Air
Flotation System, and in dewatering sludge using the new centrifuges.
This account is projected to be $76,000 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Other Chemicals expense of $24,478 is $14, 222 less than budgeted expense of
$38,700 for the six month period primarily because of less than anticipated usage
due to low influent flows and cool weather.
This account is projected to be $25,000 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Natural Gas expense of $230,123 is $84,193 higher than budgeted expense of
$145,930 for the six month period primarily because of service interruptions for
landfill gas which could not keep up with the high steam demand during the period
of nitrification related to reclaiming water; this required switching to natural gas
in one of the auxiliary boilers until steam demand decreased and the use of landfill
gas could be restored. There has been a reduced amount of run-time on the
natural gas driven influent pumps because of lower wet weather flows.
This account is projected to be $40,021 overexpended for the fiscal year.
Landfill Gas expense of $336,183 is $236,418 less than budgeted expense of
$572,601 for the six month period primarily because of the service interruptions
for landfill gas described in the preceding variance explanation, and reduced landfill
gas budgeted for full-time afterburning for the furnace operation.
This account is projected to be $309,287 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Computer Maintenance expense of $15,206 is $5,298 less than budgeted expense
of $20,504 for the six month period primarily because of a lower than anticipated
level of maintenance required due to the reliability of the Modcomp plant process
control computer and ancillary computer hardware.
This account is projected to be equivalent to budget for the fiscal year.
Janitorial and Refuse Removal expense of $26,255 is $9,828 higher than budgeted
expense of $16,427 for the six month period primarily because of unanticipated
additional janitorial services and window washing in the plant complex.
This account is projected to be $14,934 overexpended for the fiscal year.
16
Outside Safety Services expense of $30,229 is $19,729 higher than budgeted
expense of $10,500 for the six month period primarily because of the use of an
outside safety contractor during the period since the retirement of the Plant Safety
Specialist and the hiring of a replacement. Additional unanticipated expenses will
be incurred during the fiscal year for disposal of hazardous lab waste, and safety
equipment inspection and certification.
This account is projected to be $11,000 overexpended for the fiscal year.
Operating Supplies expense of $34,150 is $17,921 less than budgeted expense
of $52,071 for the six month period primarily because of a lower than anticipated
level of use of supplies in the operation of the plant, and a delay in processing a
number of supplies expense invoices for December 1991 until January 1992.
This account is projected to be $5,888 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Safety Supplies expense of $13,906 is $3,274 higher than budgeted expense of
$10,632 for the six month period primarily because of the unanticipated purchase
of chemical spill clean-up packs for certain plant locations, and purchase of
chlorine response suits recommended in a recent safety audit.
This account is projected to be $6,272 overexpended for the fiscal year.
Maintenance Supplies expense of $68,336 is $16,046 higher than budgeted
expense of $52,290 for the six month period primarily because of greater than
anticipated use of housekeeping supplies and maintenance items related to the
reconstruction of the administrative offices, and supplies used for landscape
maintenance.
This account is projected to be $15,920 overexpended for the fiscal year.
Rents and Leases expense of $58,062 is $35,748 higher than budgeted expense
of $22,314 for the six month period primarily because of rental of pumps and
piping required to operate the plant in a split-flow configuration for nitrification to
produce reclaimed water; these rental charges will be reimbursed to the District by
ttre Contra Costa Water District.
This account is projected to be $39,372 overexpended for the fiscal year.
Public Agency Fees expense of $9,300 is $26,657 less than budgeted expense of
$35,957 for the six month period primarily because the annual fee for the Bay
Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program of $22,000 was billed later than
anticipated, and will be paid in the second half of the fiscal year.
This account is projected to be equivalent to budget for the fiscal year.
17
Outside Organization Fees expense of $60,400 is $50,400 higher than budgeted
expense of $10,000 for the six month period primarily because the annual fee for
the Bay Area Dischargers Association was paid in the first, rather than the second,
half of the fiscal year.
This account is projected to be equivalent to budget for the fiscal year.
Capitalized Salaries and Wages and related capitalized accounts of $131,782 are
$63,296 less than budgeted accounts of $195,078 for the six month period
primarily because of less staff hours charged to capital projects as a result of a
staff vacancy due to the promotion and transfer of a plant engineer to another
department; the delay in the construction of the Headworks Project also
contributed to the fewer staff hours charged to capital projects.
These accounts are projected to be $45,030 underrealized for the fiscal year.
Fiscal Year Proiection:
The Plant Operations Department's operations and maintenance expenses are projected
to be $549,330 underexpended for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1992, as a net result
of the following account variances:
Underexoended
Salaries and Wages and related
employee benefits
Chlorine
Polymer
Other Chemicals
Landfill Gas
Operating Supplies
All other accounts
119,003
74,980
76,000
25,000
309,287
5,888
130.721
740.879
Overexoended
Lime
Natural Gas
Janitorial and Refuse Removals
Outside Safety Services
Safety Supplies
Maintenance Supplies
Rents and Leases
Capitalized Salaries and Wages and
related capitalized accounts
< 19,000>
<40,021 >
< 14,934>
< 11,000>
< 6,272>
< 15,920>
<39,372>
Net under expenditure
< 45.030>
< 191.549>
$549.330
18
PUMPING STATIONS
Six Months Review:
Pumping Stations operations and maintenance expenses for the six months ended
December 31, 1991 totaled $721,647, and were $21,265 less than budgeted expenses
of $742,912. The 2.9 percent underexpenditure is primarily the result of the following
expense account variances:
Salaries and Wages and related employee benefits expenses of $339,726 are
$10,014 higher than budgeted expenses of $329,712 for the six month period
primarily because of the salary differential for a vacant position which was filled by
transfer of a Treatment Plant employee.
These accounts are projected to be $12,597 overexpended for the fiscal year.
Other Chemicals expense of $220,276 is $75,736 higher than budgeted expense
of $144,540 for the six month period primarily because of the increased level of
odor and sulfide control chemicals required because of low flow volume caused by
continued drought conditions.
This account is projected to be $151,000 overexpended for the fiscal year.
Electrical expense of $113,300 is $20,326 less than budgeted expense of
$133,626 for the six month period primarily because of lower electrical usage due
to low flow volume.
This account is projected to be $30,706 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Telephone expense of $6,039 is $2,571 less than budgeted expense of $8,610 for
the six month period primarily because the telemetry system to report Pumping
Station conditions to the Treatment Plant is not fully completed.
This account is projected to be $2,553 underexpended for the fiscal year.
General Repairs and Maintenance expense of $16,093 is $16,257 less than
budgeted expense of $32,350 for the six month period primarily because of the
deferral of maintenance projects pending the development of the final scope of the
Pumping Stations Modification Project.
This account is projected to be $8,140 underexpended for the fiscal year.
Outside Repairs and Maintenance expense of $16,616 is $49,989 less than
budgeted expense of $66,605 for the six month period primarily because of the
rescheduling of a number of major facility maintenance projects, such as painting
and siding, until end of normal wet weather season.
19
This account is projected to be $24,000 underexpended.
For all other individual Pumping Stations expense accounts, the actual expense for
the six month period did not vary more than $4,200 of budgeted expense.
The cumulative net variance between actual and budgeted expenses for all these
accounts for the fiscal year is projected to be $10,619 underexpended.
Fiscal Year Projection:
The Pumping Stations operations and maintenance expenses are projected to be $87,579
overexpended for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1992, as a net result of:
overexpenditures in Salaries and Wages and related employee benefits of $12,597, and
Other Chemicals of $151,000; underexpenditures in Electrical of $30,706, Telephone of
$2,553, General Repairs and Maintenance of $8,140, and Outside Repairs and
Maintenance of $24,000; and a cumulative net underexpenditure of $10,619 in all other
accounts.
ADS/Budget#1/6MoO&M.Nar
20